Re: bgpd convert rtr_proto.c to new ibuf API

2023-10-19 Thread Theo Buehler
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 01:26:49PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:59:17PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:41:07AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > > > More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use > > > the new functions. >

Re: bgpd convert rtr_proto.c to new ibuf API

2023-10-19 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:59:17PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:41:07AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > > More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use > > the new functions. > > > > Two bits I'm unsure about: > > - I had to change some sizeof()

Re: bgpd convert rtr_proto.c to new ibuf API

2023-10-19 Thread Theo Buehler
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:41:07AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use > the new functions. > > Two bits I'm unsure about: > - I had to change some sizeof() to use native types (I especially dislike > the sizeof(struct

bgpd convert rtr_proto.c to new ibuf API

2023-10-19 Thread Claudio Jeker
More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use the new functions. Two bits I'm unsure about: - I had to change some sizeof() to use native types (I especially dislike the sizeof(struct rtr_header). - ibuf_add_nXX() can fail if the value is too large. Which should be